Debates of Oct. 21st, 2014

Opposition Motion—Ebola

[Ben Lobb, Conservative, Huron—Bruce, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my thoughts are that a lot of the time New Democrats just get it plain wrong. I think it has been proven through the years that they do get it wrong.

The point is the front-line workers. The vaccine is one thing, but the front-line workers are preparing and improving every single day to make sure that Canadians will be safe and protected if there is an outbreak. That is the most important thing. The vaccine, granted, is one thing, but based on the evidence and the facts we have today, the priority is to ensure that if there is an outbreak, all the front-line workers are protected and have been educated. It is a big job.

We have all heard what the Liberal health minister in Ontario, Dr. Eric Hoskins, has had to say. He feels very confident. He is obviously concerned and he has a big job to do, but he complimented the way our government is working with the Ontario government, and we are doing that from coast to coast.

I think New Democrats should get on board and work with the minister a little better than they do.

[Adam Vaughan, Liberal, Trinity—Spadina, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to support the motion. I do this based on my experience, largely based in Latin America and doing development and aid work, primarily in El Salvador.

The experience that I had in El Salvador informs the approach that I think is missing on this file, and it highlights some of the challenges that we have when we look as a country at what is happening. It is one of the reasons why bringing responsible ministers to committee and probing them on this issue is about more than simply addressing the immediate, important and vital concerns around Ebola, its spread in Africa, and the possibility of its spread to other countries. It is also about trying to figure out how we can change our approach to these situations so that we stop finding ourselves in a position of constantly responding to crisis. Instead, we should rearrange, restructure and rethink our foreign policy and our support of developing countries in such a way that we are practising preventative measures so that we protect populations from crisis and prevent these situations from arising.

I do have some experience with friends who have done work in Africa. One in particular has run several large refugee camps in Africa and is now working for an aid organization out of Washington. One of the things that the western countries continuously do, including Canada and other developed countries, is to decide what is in their best interests as their approach to foreign policy and development work, instead of taking a look at what is working and what is effective in the countries where they are trying to do work.

Particularly in Africa, what was found through research was that western countries in Europe and North America were more focused on saving money in the delivery of aid than actually delivering aid effectively. Particularly around food, where Africa has had huge challenges with malaria and AIDS, the drought and famine dynamic in Africa has fostered the spread of disease. Because we have not built a transportation infrastructure to deliver aid to where people need it and where people are living, what we have done is create centres to which people have to come to get food and medical resources. They get concentrated around these aid camps, pick up diseases, share them among different people from different regions of the affected area, and then go back to their smaller communities and spread those diseases.

We have become agents of contaminants and disease precisely because of the way in which we deliver aid. This is a significant problem and it needs to change. The way it needs to change is by switching our foreign policy from one of purely economic development and looking for opportunities to exploit economically on behalf of Canadian companies, to one that gets back into the process of developing the social and physical infrastructure required in these countries to manage their public health, local government and social capacities in such a way that we prevent the problems from spreading.

I am a new member, and I neglected to inform the Speaker that I will be splitting my time with the member for Random—Burin—St. George's. I apologize for that.

To return to the issue at hand, in this current situation, we need to develop an aid policy that builds capacity. If we take a look at the on-site conditions in places such as Liberia, there are no public ambulances. Not a single ambulance in that country is operated by a public entity. I recognize that perhaps there are some on the other side who think that all health care should be privatized, but the trouble with having a privatized health care system like that is that there is no effective way in an epidemic to deliver patients to hospitals safely. There is no way to deliver medicines and goods to hospitals across a country safely if there is no effective public intervention in the transportation system. This is a problem.

With the ravages of AIDS and the dynamic of depleted professional populations through these various epidemics, we have also seen that doctors and the intellectual capacity of some of these countries have been significantly challenged by the way in which they have to manage these crises. As a result of that, doctors and laboratory assistants, the very expertise that we need to combat this on the ground, are not present in some of these countries. The hopes of developing this expertise are extinguished when we invest not in universities and training but simply look to exploit minerals or other economic opportunities.

We need to change the way we do foreign policy, share our intellectual knowledge and financial capacity, and reinvest our dollars and capacity as a country into restructuring, rebuilding and reinvigorating the social capacity of these countries. That is not happening.

When we have a foreign policy driven by trade and not by development, what ends up happening is that when one of these tragedies emerges, the capacity for the country to respond is not there.

That is why we send a field laboratory into Africa rather than simply facilitating the construction and arrival of a permanent laboratory in this part of the country that could do other work after Ebola, hopefully, disappears. It is also why we see in these sorts of catastrophes in a country such as Liberia, one of the largest producers of rubber, it has no capacity to manufacture its own rubber gloves or protective gear. It is mind-blowing in terms of the simplicity that we could drive into a situation like this by moving to create capacity in these countries.

Canada has other things it can share beyond simply sending drugs here, there and everywhere, and sending temporary support to these countries. For example, with the SARS epidemic, which took root in Toronto when the epidemic spread to our country, we have developed some of the finest public health protocols. Those health protocols are contained within our borders.

We have not set up the capacity to train public health workers in other countries. We have not used our acquired intelligence on these things to pursue a policy of developing capacity in these countries. Again, we return to a trade-based foreign policy instead of a social development policy. As a result of that, these crises emerge and they emerge unchecked in countries that are struggling to provide basic services to their people.

As I said, I worked in El Salvador. I have delivered aid directly to municipalities there. It was not a program supported by the federal government. It was a program supported by the City of Toronto. It was a city-to-city initiative that saw us taking decommissioned ambulances, repairing them, driving them to El Salvador and building the only public ambulance capacity in that developing country.

As a country, we have the capacity, the resources and the expertise to build and develop this capacity in Africa in places where not only Ebola but other diseases and famine and civil war are destroying civil society. We need to reinvest in our capacity to create civil society.

One comment that was made across the aisle that I think is an important one was about bringing more than just the health ministers to bear. Bringing the development minister and the foreign affairs contingent of the executive branch of government is critically important because we need to start reorienting our approach to foreign aid in such a way as we build capacity. That is missing from this debate. A focused and sustained conversation through committee is the way to start to change the way the government and our country responds to international dynamics.

We need to do this and we need to do it in a way that allows for our country's capacity and talent to shine on the international stage, rather than to simply respond and deliver the same message time and time again, that it is all about trade. It is as if somehow trade is going to stop a disease from spreading or that somehow trade is going to build capacity in a country where quite clearly the capacity has not been built, despite the fact that Liberia's gross domestic product has been outpacing most of Africa's, growing at a rate close to China for the last five years. That growth is now significantly threatened.

This is the direction in which the Liberal Party hopes to take foreign policy. This is the direction in which we hope to focus debate through committee. That is why we are asking members of the House to support the member's motion.

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for his speech. I was listening carefully. One of the things we learned in the House, and members would remember H1N1, is the importance of communications and getting the messages out to Canadians.

Does the member opposite feel that the all-parliamentarian briefings, the numerous press conferences and daily question period appearances are insufficient to keep Canadians updated? I feel, from experience, that our public health officials should be working at their jobs during issues like this. They should be out there working to communicate with Canadians directly and with their international partners to work internationally to see if we can work together to solve these issues.

Therefore, why does he think that everything that is being done out there is not sufficient to keep Canadians updated?

[Adam Vaughan, Liberal, Trinity—Spadina, ON]

Mr. Speaker, one of the great challenges in the modern world is effective communication. While we have sometimes pat answers to very complex questions posed in question period, the inability to follow up and get detailed answers beyond talking points is frustrating many of us who are trying to communicate with our constituents but more importantly to communicate with all Canadians.

The committee allows for us not necessarily to communicate directly, not to frustrate the rank and file and the members of the public service that are doing the work day in and day out, but to talk to the leadership from the parliamentarians of this country specifically about ideas, strategies and emerging issues, as well as to explore new courses of action, which are cropping up around the world and are being presented to us from different locales right around the globe. This allows us to focus efforts, communicate and explore the issue, and also to create more effective policy.

The problem with simply relying on a website or relying on sitting down in private with the minister and talking about this is that new ideas do not see the light of day and as a result of that our approach stays locked in a process that, quite frankly, has failed these countries and has failed this country in terms of its international reputation.

[Peggy Nash, NDP, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I have to say that the way we deliver aid certainly is an area where Canada can improve greatly. It is something that I also have experience in and I share the concern about that.

I want to take a moment and thank both the leader of the official opposition and the member of Parliament for Vancouver East for all their work on this file. Specifically the member for Vancouver East has raised a number of very serious, specific, important questions that I think this motion is trying to get answers to. It was regarding Canada's emergency preparedness and I would like to cite from a letter that the member for Vancouver East has sent to the health minister and she asked a number of very practical questions that are still not answered.

Who is responsible for ensuring quarantine and treatment protocols for Canadians? What communications have been undertaken by the Public Health Agency to inform Canadians? What kinds of screening protocols are currently in use at ports of entry? What kinds of precautions will protect Canadians who are—

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Barry Devolin]

If the member has a question, she can put it. If not, I will go to the member for Trinity—Spadina.

[Peggy Nash, NDP, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. There were just so many questions that remained unanswered.

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Barry Devolin]

Right. I appreciate that another hon. member had many questions. The question is does this member have a question for the speaker.

[Peggy Nash, NDP, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my question is this. Are these the kinds of questions that the member for Vancouver East has been trying to get answers to that the member for Toronto perceives would be answered by getting the minister to the health committee?

[Adam Vaughan, Liberal, Trinity—Spadina, ON]

Mr. Speaker, one would hope and one would have expectations and good faith that those are the sorts of answers that we would receive with the sorts of questions that we have composed and tabled in the House as questions that need serious answers.

However, my speech focused not just on the emergency response and the reactive capacity of government, but we need to also start to probe and start to put together a program that is proactive and is actively engaged in creating capacity in countries in Africa but also in Latin America and Southeast Asia. It is not good enough to simply keep responding to crises, whether it is the housing crisis, the crisis in the Middle East, or whether it is crisis in Liberia and Nigeria and the countries of West Africa.

This country knows that if we prepare for problems ahead of time, we mitigate the impact of disasters. We may not be able to prevent them, but preventive action is just as important, in fact even more vitally important to invest in, especially in developing countries. Yes, there are questions about the reaction of the government, but we also want to steer the government back into a role that traditionally Canada has played, which is being proactive and anticipating the need to build civil capacity in developing countries. It is something we have done proudly in the past, but seem to have abandoned in favour of a trade-based foreign policy.

Message from the Senate

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Barry Devolin]

Before we resume debate, I have the honour to inform the House that a message has been received from the Senate informing the House that the Senate has passed the following bill to which the concurrence of the House is desired: Bill S-6, An Act to amend the Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Act and the Nunavut Waters and Nunavut Surface Rights Tribunal Act.

The House resumed consideration of the motion and of the amendment.

Opposition Motion—Ebola

[Judy Foote, Liberal, Random—Burin—St. George's, NL]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak in support of this important motion from my Liberal colleague the hon. member for Vancouver Centre.

The Ebola outbreak in West Africa has been described by the United Nations as a crisis unparalleled in modern times. Never before have we seen an outbreak of Ebola this large, severe, or complex. According to the World Health Organization, as of October 12, 2014, a total of 8,973 cases and 4,484 deaths have been reported in Guinea, Liberia, Sierra Leone, and Nigeria, with an additional death recorded in both Spain and the United States. Clearly it is an unprecedented global health crisis requiring an unprecedented international response. However, in the words of Doctors Without Borders international president Dr. Joanne Liu, the international response has been “lethally, inadequate”. The disease has taken its toll on health care workers in West Africa, with 427 infected and so far 236 dead.

After seeing the price being paid by brave health care workers in the region, I was deeply concerned to read reports that even after the Ebola outbreak began, the Canadian federal government chose to sell off rather than donate roughly $1.5 million worth of stockpiled medical equipment at bargain basement prices, even though this very equipment is urgently needed.

GlobalMedic's director of emergency programs estimates that 130 of the 150 pallets of personal protective equipment his organization has shipped to Sierra Leone and Liberia came from the Public Health Agency of Canada's stockpile that was sold off at an auction. This is simply unacceptable. How was it allowed to happen? Surely health care workers fighting the Ebola crisis in West Africa need masks more than the Canadian government needed the $50 it reportedly received for 500,000 masks sold at an auction.

However, as we have seen through the tragic infection of health care workers in Dallas and Madrid, even the well-equipped, sophisticated medical systems of the west are not immune.

My Liberal colleagues and I are concerned about the recent cases of Ebola that have emerged in North America and the government's minimal communication to the public and to Parliament on the level of Canada's preparedness. At any outbreak, clear and open communication is key to both the coordination of prevention efforts and reducing fear and confusion. That is why I am calling on members of the House to support the motion from my Liberal colleague the hon. member for Vancouver Centre. Regular and frequent updates are essential measures to keep Canadians safe and informed about the Ebola virus disease.

Having key members of the federal government appear before the health committee on a twice-monthly basis to inform Parliament and Canadians on the specific measures they are taking to ensure the Ebola virus does not pose a threat to the health and safety of Canadians is an important part of the motion. Hearing from experts such as the Chief Public Health Officer of Canada and from the ministers responsible for Canada's response would help to ensure Parliament is kept informed and Canadians receive timely updates on the government's actions.

Having the ministers and the Chief Public Health Officer of Canada appear before the health committee would also allow members to question the government on, for example, what precautions are being taken for the Canada Border Services Agency at land and marine crossings, in addition to airports. These are areas the government has not been clear about. Being open and transparent is essential to keeping the public informed and reducing confusion about the dangers these diseases pose to our country.

Recent false alarms throughout Canada, however, have shown the strength of the Canadian medical system and the professionalism of our public health professionals when they have the information and the resources they need.

Earlier this month, for instance, Eastern Health in Newfoundland and Labrador undertook a series of simulated emergency preparedness exercises in three hospitals in St. John's. According to Dr. David Allison, Eastern Health's Medical Officer of Health:

The purpose of this exercise is to further challenge and validate our procedures to ensure that possible cases of Ebola, or other infectious diseases, are correctly contained, diagnosed appropriately and treated quickly

This past weekend, the Public Health Agency of Canada conducted a practice drill, deploying one of its Ebola rapid response teams to Nova Scotia. This is an important exercise, and we believe that the agency must continue to work with provincial and territorial governments to ensure that regional hospitals are set up with the highest level of isolation protocols and treatment units if a case should reach Canada.

I know that I and all residents of Newfoundland and Labrador are comforted that we have such capable and dedicated public health professionals guarding against Ebola in our province. We should not, however, be complacent. The current government has shown little regard for public health in the past. It was only this September that the government finally appointed Dr. Gregory Taylor as chief medical officer, 16 months after his predecessor stepped down. To leave that critical job vacant for 16 months, even as the health crisis gripped West Africa and potential Ebola patients were being isolated in Canadian hospitals, is deeply troubling.

The Canadian Federation of Nurses Unions has also raised concerns about the lack of training and protective equipment in some areas. Every front-line health care worker throughout the country should be provided with training, and personal protective equipment should be made available. The recent exercise by the Public Health Agency of Canada in Nova Scotia is an excellent start, but these emergency preparedness drills should be held throughout the country to ensure coordinated responses in all provinces and territories.

Furthermore, the Public Health Agency of Canada must coordinate regular meetings of professional groups like the Canadian Public Health Association, the Canadian Medical Association, Canadian Nurses Association, and the Association of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Disease Canada to ensure members and member associations, such as the Newfoundland and Labrador Medical Association, are kept informed of data protocols, evolving medical best practices, and risk assessments. These organizations have a vital role to play in ensuring medical personnel on the ground are aware of early signs and symptoms of Ebola and how to deal with suspected cases in a way that protects them and everyone around them.

I commend the selfless efforts of the many Canadian public health professionals who have already answered the call for assistance and have been taking on leadership roles in the medical response in West Africa. Currently, Dr. Eilish Cleary, New Brunswick's Chief Medical Officer of Health, is in West Africa working with a World Health Organization team to contain the outbreak. So far, 14 employees of the National Microbiology Laboratory in Winnipeg have gone overseas to assist with disaster response. Doctors Without Borders and the Canadian Red Cross have mobilized Canadian health care workers to aid in the response. We owe them an enormous debt of gratitude, and we wish them a safe return home when their work is finished.

These Canadians have put themselves at risk and have made incredible personal sacrifices to help fight this devastating epidemic at its source. Despite their efforts, the number of Ebola cases in West Africa is growing every day, and humanitarian organizations' capacity to respond is diminishing.

The current government has made many promises, but of the $35 million pledged this September, only $4.3 million has been committed according to the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs. Both at home and abroad, we need more transparency in the federal government's response to this public health crisis, and that is patently obvious when we watch the news. Last night I watched a piece on the CBC by Adrienne Arsenault. It was heartbreaking to look at what is happening in countries abroad with respect to Ebola, and to see people who are helpless, who are looking for help, and that help is not there.

We have to do our part as Canadians. We have to do what Canada is known for doing, and that is being there to help in times of crisis. Unfortunately, it does not appear that we have been doing what people expect Canada to do, and that is to be at the forefront of fighting a crisis like the one we are now experiencing with Ebola.

This motion is an important step in the direction of ensuring that we are aware of what is happening on a daily basis, that reports are being made by those in a position to give us and, more importantly, Canadians the information so we are able to deal with this crisis in a manner that will save lives, not see more lives lost.

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for a very well-researched and moving speech.

We know that the Chief Public Health Officer of Canada actually has to report to Parliament as public health officer of Canada, and reporting to Parliament through the health committee is an appropriate way to do so. I think this is about openness, this is about transparency, and this is about public accountability, because there are many questions that have not been answered in this House. There are many questions that have not been answered in both of the public press conferences held by the minister and the Chief Public Health Officer on Friday and on Monday, which dealt with the vaccines, why it took so long, why only a little over $4 million of $65 million promised has been received, where the rest of the money is, and why it is not there. We know that timeliness is important.

My question for my colleague is simply this. How else—and let us imagine that no one else wanted to accept this motion—can we get accountability, transparency, and openness from the Chief Public Health Officer and from the Minister of Health, whose duty it is to actually coordinate and manage any infection that occurs in Canada and abroad?

[Judy Foote, Liberal, Random—Burin—St. George's, NL]

Mr. Speaker, first, I thank the member for Vancouver Centre for the motion, which is so important. It is about transparency, it is about knowing what is happening, and it is about knowing how the Ebola crisis is being dealt with. Never before have we seen a crisis as complex as this, when it comes to Ebola.

As the member said, the reporting to Parliament is very important, but what it would also do is provide information to Canadians, from coast to coast to coast, so that they have a level of comfort about what is happening, in terms of how their country is dealing with this issue and how, as a country, we are reaching out and helping in other parts of the world, which is our responsibility to do as a part of this global nation.

Yes, we need to have more transparency and more accountability. That is what the motion would do. I am hoping that everybody in the House will recognize that and support the motion of the hon. member for Vancouver Centre.

[Jonathan Tremblay, NDP, Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC]

Mr. Speaker, do the Liberals really think that asking the Minister of Health to show up twice a month will protect Canadians?

I think this is a feeble motion. Would they be willing to amend it and strengthen it to make it more forceful, more substantial, in order to better protect Canadians?

[Judy Foote, Liberal, Random—Burin—St. George's, NL]

Mr. Speaker, I am not sure what the member is proposing, but at least what the motion would do is bring the minister, front and centre, to give the answers we are desperately seeking to a lot of the questions that still remain, with respect to this crisis.

Let us bring all the ministers who have a responsibility for public safety in front, along with the public health officer. Let us at least take that first step and see where we go from there.

When we are talking about transparency, accountability, and openness, the motion is certainly a step in the right direction and if we have to build upon that, we can.

However, right now, that is what we have on the floor before us. Let us do everything we can to provide Canadians that level of comfort, as well as the rest of the world.

[Mike Sullivan, NDP, York South—Weston, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate this opportunity to speak about a world crisis.

I will be splitting my time with the member for Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert.

Eleven years ago, Toronto was overwhelmed by a virus, which arrived from Hong Kong, called SARS. I want to give the House some appreciation of the impact. It is estimated that it cost the world $40 billion in health care and productivity costs. We are coming close to that figure now for the Ebola crisis. Estimates of a $30-billion cost, just to try to corral the disease, have come to light, and Canadians are telling us in great numbers that Canada should be doing as much as it possibly can, including sending military response teams, which so far the government has refused to do.

I want to come back to the SARS experience. My wife had a very personal experience with the SARS outbreak. She was diagnosed with breast cancer just after the hospitals started closing in Toronto. The hospitals started closing in Toronto because the SARS outbreak was impossible to corral. People did not really understand it and did not know what to do. All of a sudden, her surgery to remove part of her breast was cancelled, because the hospitals were no longer accepting patients. Now she had a rapidly growing tumour in her body that could not be removed.

Somehow our family doctor managed to find a doctor willing to do the operation at a hospital in Toronto. It was one of the most eerie and disturbing experiences anyone could hope to imagine. Late in the evening, I had to pull up to the outside of the hospital and let her go in on her own. I was not allowed in. She had to check in with the security guard and then find her own way to the 11th floor, where she was the only person. She had to go to her own bed and wait there in the hope that someone would show up. That is how empty that hospital was. The next day, a surgeon and a small surgical team operated. That experience was repeated over and over again in Toronto as Toronto tried to deal with the very real problem of trying to maintain a health system while the health system itself was under attack.

Something that I am not sure everybody here understands is that one of the potential problems with this disease is that it is so easily spread that even health care workers who are taking extreme precautions, as has been the case in Dallas and Spain, have become infected. No one is really certain why these health care workers became infected, because they should not have. They had been taking precautions. If that is the ease with which this disease can spread, how are hospitals in my city of Toronto going to cope when and if cases of Ebola, and I do not think it is a matter of if but of when, start arriving in greater numbers than we have already experienced?

There are currently 9,000 or so reported cases of Ebola in West Africa, and there is no travel ban. There is no limit on people travelling out of that area. The incubation period for this disease before any symptoms arise is between two and 21 days. That means that people can be travelling while infected and not know it. We are apparently conducting some voluntary screening of some passengers who are coming from these affected places, but I am very afraid that we are going to have a very serious problem should this disease make its inexorable travel to more countries, including Canada.

The mayor of my city has learned, as have I, that the government has declared at least one hospital in Toronto and 10 in Ontario as special hospitals for dealing with potential Ebola cases. In a letter to the Prime Minister that I do not believe has been responded to yet, the mayor asked for more details on the Government of Canada's plans to protect residents of Toronto and the GTA should any cases of the Ebola virus be positively identified in Canada and in Toronto.

A Toronto hospital has been designated to care for Canadian responders if any become infected in the Ebola zone in West Africa and are transferred back to Canada for care. We have a situation in which the government has decided, absent the City of Toronto, that it will designate a hospital, with all good intentions, I am sure. However, the people of Toronto should know what is going on. There should be some transparency. The mayor has asked for that transparency. We, too, would like that transparency.

The member for Vancouver East has asked similar questions of the Minister of Health, questions about who is responsible for ensuring quarantine and about who is responsible for making sure that the hospitals and medical practitioners have the appropriate equipment.

It has become clear that the equipment that we thought was appropriate is not working, because 20% of the victims of this virus are health care workers. That means that they are not able to protect themselves. As we have found out, two, one in Texas and one in Spain, became infected while caring for a patient with all of the west's most modern equipment. Something is wrong with the approach we are taking.

There are a number of other questions I will not go through, but those questions deserve answers. The Minister of Health needs to respond to our critic for health so that we can have a dialogue, so that we can begin the process the Liberal opposition day motion would like to continue, which is to continue the process of providing information to members of Parliament, through the committee, on a twice monthly basis.

That, in itself, is not enough. There will need to be a whole lot more done, but it is a good start. We will be supporting this motion.

The other thing I wanted to mention is that in my riding of York South—Weston, there is a company called Tagg Design that two years ago developed a system for hospitals to use to protect themselves, to protect health care workers and others, from the transmission of infectious diseases inside a hospital. That system was a system of signage, a system of making sure that doors were sealed and that doors had signs on them to say that the patient behind the door required this kind of protection for the health care workers.

We wrote to the Minister of Health at the time and asked for a meeting to discuss this kind of system, which the WHO is very interested in and which Canadian hospitals that have tried it have found to be effective.

We asked the minister for a meeting to discuss how the Government of Canada could assist in promoting this kind of inside-the-hospital protection against the transmission of infectious diseases. Unfortunately, the minister refused to meet with us. We had an indication from the government that it was really not interested in proactive measures to protect health care workers from the spread of infectious diseases, and not just health care workers but other people who use those hospitals.

We know that the government would rather just let things take place. Apparently it has designated a hospital, and we do not know which one, as the place where people will go. We do not know whether that will then require the closure of that hospital.

If a hospital is declared the place where Canadian health care workers go if they contract Ebola, and that hospital is in my city, I would like to know. The medical staff of that hospital would probably like to know that the hospital has been so designated so they can start planning around it, so they can start determining whether it has to rearrange the schedules for surgeries and other care for patients who are there. It is quite likely, given the experiences in Texas and Spain, that if a number of patients with Ebola arrive at a hospital, we are going to see it close. We are going to see that hospital become, itself, quarantined.

That is an effect of this disease that has yet to be discussed in any form. It has been asked about, by our mayor and others. What are the government's plans? As of this moment, we do not have answers, and we need those answers. This motion will help give us those answers.

[Libby Davies, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for his very thoughtful comments on this important debate that we are having today. I would also like to thank him for sharing his personal family experience, because I think these things matter a lot in terms of impacts on our health care system.

Certainly we in the NDP have been raising the issue of the Ebola crisis almost every day in the House. The leader of the official opposition, the member for Outremont, and others in our caucus have been raising this issue with the Minister of Health, and there are many unanswered questions.

I think the member well understands the importance of the health care infrastructure that we have in this country. We need to have protocols in place, hence some of the questions in the letter that we sent to the minister, but for West Africa, not having basic health infrastructure is a critical issue, whether it is clinics, delivery systems, or access to primary health care. I wonder if the member would comment in terms of the importance of Canada supporting that kind of long-term initiative.

[Mike Sullivan, NDP, York South—Weston, ON]

Mr. Speaker, clearly it is in Canada's best interest as a country and as a people to ensure that diseases such as Ebola are contained where they break out. However, they will not be contained if the places they break out in do not have adequate resources and a public health system in place.

The U.S. government has started supporting the creation of public health systems in third world countries, but we have not. Our approach has been to give money to mining companies in those countries to create systems that are not related to public health.

We need to be ever mindful and ever vigilant that these diseases, which are springing up in more than the usual number, need to be corralled and controlled in the locations where they break out.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I want to pick up on the member's personal experience in Toronto.

I am very sympathetic to the member's personal story, which highlighted the importance of recognizing that in the federation that we live in, we have many different jurisdictions. Some jurisdictions, such as the Province of Ontario, have a fairly large department of health with a lot of professionals, while smaller provinces may not have the same sort of resources. I say this because it is important that the federal government play the coordinating role in establishing a protocol so that people have a sense of what would happen if a case of Ebola is discovered in our country.

I wonder if the member might expand on the importance of the federal government working with provincial ministries of health and of those ministries working with Health Canada to ensure that we are all on the same page, and that if someone is discovered to be infected with Ebola, we will be using a common protocol that is in the best interests of all.

[Mike Sullivan, NDP, York South—Weston, ON]

Mr. Speaker, clearly it is in the best interests of all Canadians to have a health care system that is roughly equal everywhere one goes. We do not want to discover that if we get sick in one province, we are worse off than if we had that same illness in another province.

However, that is how our systems have started to devolve over the years. There has been very little effort on the part of the federal government to enforce the Canada Health Act. This is yet another example of the government's central role in ensuring that the standards, the practices, and, in the case of infectious disease outbreaks, the protections that are necessary to protect the public and health care workers are actively followed and are at the best possible quality across the country so that we do not have situations in which people are better off in one province than another.

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Barry Devolin]

It is my duty, pursuant to Standing Order 38, to inform the House that the questions to be raised tonight at the time of adjournment are as follows: the hon. member for Lac-Saint-Louis, the Environment; the hon. member for Thunder Bay—Superior North, Democratic Reform.

[Djaouida Sellah, NDP, Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Mr. Speaker, a month ago, my colleague from Laurier—Sainte-Marie called for an emergency debate on Canada's response to the Ebola epidemic. A month ago, the WHO reported that there were over 2,000 victims. Now, there are over 4,000. In one month, the number of victims doubled. A simple calculation reveals that if we do not stop the spread of the virus, in 18 months, 4 million people will have the disease.

This is an international health emergency, and members of the House have a sense of responsibility in light of this human condition. We are all very worried about what is happening in West Africa. We are following the development of this crisis, and the international response is essential, not just in terms of providing vaccines, but also in terms of making sure that medical supplies, protective equipment and human resources are on the ground.

There is not enough international aid at this time. The international community has given only 38% of the $988 million requested by the UN. The Conservative government has made some big announcements, promising international aid totalling $65 million. However, only $5 million has been paid out so far. What happened to the rest? When will the government free up the funding it promised? These are just more empty promises from the Conservative government. Here is what Michael Hurley, president of the Ontario Council of Hospital Unions, had to say yesterday:

[The government's] financial contribution has been paltry...I've seen no evidence of any mobilization of financial or health human resources behind the fight from Canada in West Africa. The...government's theory that Ebola's coming to Canada is inevitable is true only if it remains committed to doing almost nothing to assist West Africa.

The best thing to do is to nip this epidemic in the bud, which means tackling it at the source and containing it in West Africa to prevent it from crossing our borders.

The deployment of UN-led military resources must be considered, along with access to emergency treatment. The Prime Minister has refused to send in the Disaster Assistance Response Team, even though the humanitarian organizations working on the ground in West Africa continue to call for an emergency military deployment in order to provide rapid logistical support for the humanitarian response. The WHO has said that it can meet only 21% of the need for beds in Liberia, 29% in Sierra Leone and 50% in Guinea. In September, the WHO identified 300 health care workers who were infected with the Ebola virus.

These countries have been devastated by the epidemic and cannot really fight it without adequate logistical and human reinforcements.

We have the civilian, logistical, technological and even military capacity to help the organizations working on the ground. Canada's response to this crisis should include disaster response teams that specialize in health and biohazard management, either through DART or some other mechanism.

Why is the Conservative government not considering the possibility of deploying teams that specialize in health and biohazard management? As hon. members know, Canada has that capacity. Why does the government not want to send in reinforcements to help the agencies on the ground?

I understand that we should not be alarmist and predict that contagion is imminent in Canada, but in my opinion, having the Minister of Health, the Chief Public Health Officer of Canada and the Minister of Public Safety appear before the committee is not a lot to ask and should not be so off-putting to the members across the way.

This would help reassure our constituents. Canadians need to be sure that the Public Health Agency of Canada will be able to properly respond to an outbreak of the virus in Canada. The suspected cases so far have revealed flaws in our preparedness and coordination. Holding drills and setting up response teams are steps in the right direction, but they came one month after notification of the first cases in the United States and Spain.

Communicating clearly with the public, reconsidering our investments in public health and being certain that we are doing everything possible to protect the health of Canadians are all reasons that the motion being debated today makes sense. The Minister of Health, the Chief Public Health Officer of Canada and the Minister of Public Safety need to appear before the committee to answer our constituents' questions, and especially so that we can track Canada's decisions and its operations in West Africa.

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member for participating in this debate. As a physician, she would probably be able to shed light on this question. If in the space of one month, after Canada had supposedly sent so much aid, we saw a doubling of the number of deaths, based on the evidence, surely that should say to somebody that it was not working because there should not be double the number of deaths if what we were doing was working and was timely. Through some disclosure in debate in the House today, we have since found out that we cannot account for a lot of the aid that was promised and did not get there, including vaccines.

The World Health Organization has repeatedly asked for more personnel to help on the ground. We know that Cuba sent 365, the United States sent 3,000 of their armed forces out there on the ground immediately and Canada has sent 13 people. The minister has suggested that she would not send anyone unless we have an exit strategy. Surely, if Cuba can do this and the United States can send 3,000 people right off the bat a month ago, I would like to know this.

Could the minister not follow what they were doing? Could she not follow their exit strategies instead of dragging our feet once again? Since April, we have been dragging our feet on this.